Burnham

[Pross]

It doesn’t feel beyond the realms of reality to create pensioners index for inflation based on their typical ‘shopping basket’. If it’s felt pensions need increasing relative to that simply say it’s going up by the pensioners price index plus x%.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Except Burnham is not talking about the next manifesto but rather this Government (under the 2024 manifesto they were elected on) passing a law to end the triple lock:

it will not be this government if it is returned for another period, but the next government.

 

[Ian H]

I’ll never understand the rationale behind the link to wage increase. With the other two pensions are guaranteed to at least match inflation and, in times of low inflation, grow faster. The rate of wage increase seems completely irrelevant. I don’t see why it is considered so sacrosanct.

Because relative poverty is a thing.

 

[Psamathe]

There's already a cap of the tax free cash from private pensions - masrginally higher than the £250k you mention, at £268,500, based on 25% of the last lifetime allowance.
Plenty of public sector pensions would exceed the £1m so why are you wanting to go after private pensions when public sector salary related ones are the platinum standard and far more generous than defined contribution pensions in the private sector?
Switch the public sector to DC on the same basis as Workplace Pension requirements instead.

My point was that there are many ways of raising additional income to offset the cost of maintaining the State Pension for those with nothing in addition. I agree public sector pensions is another way to achieve that. Use several of the possible ways and it is easy to keep the Triple Lock as well as reducing the overall costs.

State Pension costs might be increasing but maybe the population age profile is a contributing factor, just as the cost of disability benefits is impacted by the numbers claiming. We can't easily adjust the population age profile but we can help those on long term sickness benefits to get treatment thereby reducing the number of claimants and thus the costs.

 

[Psamathe]

it will not be this government if it is returned for another period, but the next government.

But Burnham is talking about passing the laws in this Government despite his undertaking not to do so.

Changing the pension increase takes time and in reality the next Government will not have time to review the finances, get OBR to do their assessment, present a budget to Parliament and then give the Civil Service to make new changes. Ie he is making the change despite undertakings; financial changes are virtually never implemented day King signs the legislation and virtually always have a future start date.

 

[Rusty Nails]

But Burnham is talking about passing the laws in this Government despite his undertaking not to do so.

Changing the pension increase takes time and in reality the next Government will not have time to review the finances, get OBR to do their assessment, present a budget to Parliament and then give the Civil Service to make new changes. Ie he is making the change despite undertakings; financial changes are virtually never implemented day King signs the legislation and virtually always have a future start date.

Did he say that he would not talk about passing the laws in this government, or that he would not change the laws in this government?

In my view if he thinks that they should be changed in the next government then he is right to give advance warning.

The fact that such a change takes time makes it even more important that they start in time to be implemented in 2030...not day one of the next government. The legislation will have a future start date.

 

[Psamathe]

Did he say that he would not talk about passing the laws in this government, or that he would not change the laws in this government?

In my view if he thinks that they should be changed in the next government then he is right to give advance warning.

The fact that such a change takes time makes it even more important that they start in time to be implemented in 2030...not day one of the next government. The legislation will have a future start date.

Reports

Burnham to pass law scrapping pension triple lock before next election​

However, guidance published alongside the speech shows that the government intends to legislate before then, requiring MPs to vote on the changes.

ie Laws making the change this Parliament and not the advanced warnings of intended laws in next Parliament.

I agree about advanced warning but he is taking about law changes this Parliament.

Edit: I agree that if it's advanced warning of his intent foin a 2nd term/next PArliament then a very different matter as it would be new pledges and electorate getting a vote but he's not waiting, not honouring his pledges.

 

[Pross]

Because relative poverty is a thing.

Still struggling with it sorry. It doesn’t matter whether a pensioner’s income is getting higher or lower relative to wages, it matters how well it is holding up against expenditure. Likewise, if average wages are increasing by 5% when inflation is 3% it doesn’t really matter if my salary only increases by 3% as that covers my extra costs. I might be unhappy and move job but I’m not worse off because others are better off.

If the overall value needs raising relatively then just say it will be increased by a percentage above inflation.

 

[secretsqirrel]

Let’s face it, he is taking the heat off the next government whoever they are. They all secretly want to scrap triple lock but are not brave enough to say it.

 

[Psamathe]

Still struggling with it sorry. It doesn’t matter whether a pensioner’s income is getting higher or lower relative to wages, it matters how well it is holding up against expenditure. Likewise, if average wages are increasing by 5% when inflation is 3% it doesn’t really matter if my salary only increases by 3% as that covers my extra costs. I might be unhappy and move job but I’m not worse off because others are better off.

If the overall value needs raising relatively then just say it will be increased by a percentage above inflation.

I'm not an economist but I suspect wage growth will have an effect on inflation hence, as you say inflation reflects the living costs of a pensioner, but also longer term the inflation increases will also at least partially reflect wage growth.

 

[briantrumpet]

Let’s face it, he is taking the heat off the next government whoever they are. They all secretly want to scrap triple lock but are not brave enough to say it.

I think this is why Burnham's speech landed quite well in many quarters – most politicians seem to have abdicated any responsibility to help change the views of the electorate, preferring to follow and amplify unsustainable positions, whether that's on pensions, or taxes, or immigration, or whatever.

 

[Pblakeney]

Let’s face it, he is taking the heat off the next government whoever they are. They all secretly want to scrap triple lock but are not brave enough to say it.

This is the thing. Most people know that the triple lock has to go. He is announced that it will go. Most people should be happy.
But no, they have to moan about how it it going to go. Can't please all the people all the time, and some will never be happy.

 

[briantrumpet]

This is the thing. Most people know that the triple lock has to go. He is announced that it will go. Most people should be happy.
But no, they have to moan about how it it going to go. Can't please all the people all the time, and some will never be happy.

I have found some of the carping amusing, especially from the Starmer loyalists. If only Badenoch weren't such an arrogant and shallow very-online Tory leader, there is an opening there for a principled not racist opposition, as Davey tries Lib Dem populism, Greens are going batshit as they explore how to avoid being too obviously Green, and Reform wallows in financial mire and outright racism (via Braverman and others).

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Most people know that the triple lock has to go. He is announced that it will go. Most people should be happy.

Common sense innit.

 

[Psamathe]

Most people know that the triple lock has to go.

Do they? Or are they just beleieving what they've been told by those with their own agendas?

I'm sure the benefits bill has to be reduced but ending the Triple Lock is very very far from the only way and there are actually many far better ways (win-win ways and ways that don't impact those struggling on State Pension alone).